Talk:Svan language

Untitled
This got protected at the vandal's version. When it's unprotected, please revert as soon as possible. RickK 02:14, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

Oops. Hmm, let's see, rules are if there's a consensus on the talk page, we can revert it without unprotecting it, right? I'll wait until tomorrow and see if there are any objections. UninvitedCompany 02:25, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

Yes, please revert the page to the other version. This one tries to make it appear that Svan is just a dialect of Georgian (false - the languages seem to be as different as Greek and Latin, if not more), deletes half of the dialect list and important external links, and a few more things. Thanks... Jorge Stolfi 05:45, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

The Svans are not Georgians
What is this: "Svan language ....spoken in .... by Georgians of Svan origin". What is this? The term "Georgians of Svan origin" used by Georgian politicians. Svans use a different language from Georgians. The term "Georgians of Svan origin" is not neutral and not scientific! Let us again: This wikipedia is not Georgia's Wikipedia! --Kmoksy (talk) 17:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Are you not tired of this? I have a million Svan relatives and this is the first time I hear that they are not Georgians. They speak a different language, just like Mingrelians, because their language is millenia old and it PREDATES the concept of what you know as "Georgian." You do not even have the basic understanding of the Georgian nation formation and I really suggest that you do some credible research before posting this nonsense in every corner. When Georgia started forming in the mid of the first millennium AD after Christianization, it was a GROUP of related peoples getting together, hence the certain regional differences in all parts of the country, with Svans and Mingrelians being the extreme example.


 * Good look at history of France, a million people in the south speak Occitan language, are they not French? Having a different national language than one that's indigenous is more common than you think and that is because some languages predate the national identities. If Turks like you can claim to be a nation after colonizing the Anatolian peninsula, I am not sure why an ancient country like Georgia cannot claim to be a nation after so many years.-- ComtesseDeMingrélie  17:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Let us again: This wikipedia is not Georgia's Wikipedia! --Kmoksy (talk) 17:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You keep repeating that but that does not counter my argument. I just wrote two paragraph with concrete examples and that is all you have to say?-- ComtesseDeMingrélie  17:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * This is another anti-Georgian hysteria, first they targeted Mingrelian article and now Svans are not Georgians :) Listen there Kmoksy, I'm Svan and a real one, my ancestors are from Ushguli and Mestia, I speak Svan and most of my relatives are Svans and we are proud Georgians. Take your anti-Georgian rhetoric somewhere else. If there are no numerous scholarly references suggesting otherwise, I dont think its worth waisting time. Iberieli (talk) 01:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Iberieli, he will find you plenty of "scholarly" works written by scholar-prostitutes from Russia. What you mean is credible scholarly references, and that is something he does not have.-- ComtesseDeMingrélie  02:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It's probably just a confusion of what one takes the term "Georgian" to mean. If one uses it limited to people speaking specifically the Georgian language, this wouldn't include Svans. Yet "Georgian" can also (be taken to) mean 'people from Georgia', in which case Svans being proud Georgians is no problem at all. --JorisvS (talk) 15:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Iberieli, what about those Svans who don’t consider themselves to be ethnic Georgians? Apswaaa (talk) 20:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Francization of ethnic minorities in France Apswaaa (talk) 21:37, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You are wrong JorisV, being from Georgia and being an ethnic Georgian is not the same. Svans are ethnic Georgians just like Mingrelians but they use a different language because the language predates the ethnic group - Georgians - which started to come into existence only in the middle of the 1st millennium AD. This is something you would understand 1. if you were familiar with the Georgia's nation formation. 2. at least read my post above. I am tired of repeating myself for ignorant people who randomly drop by and make uncalled for conclusions.-- ComtesseDeMingrélie  15:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems to be the case that the Georgian ethnicity includes Svans and that Svans see themselves both as Ethnic Georgians and ethnic Svans which isn't really problematic since ethnic identities are not necessarily mutually exclusive.·Maunus· ƛ · 16:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There is not such thing as ethnic Svan, they are ethnic Georgians just as us Mingrelians. Being part of a different kingdom 2 thousand years ago does not make one of a different ethnicity. Almost all parts of Georgia at some points have been independent, separate kingdoms.If you go back to the time of Colchis, the residents of the Kingdom probably did consider themselves a different,although related group, of the East. Yet, ethnicities do become obsolete after millenia of intermarriage. The languages are just vestiges of past differences.-- ComtesseDeMingrélie  18:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Proto-Kartvelian was spoken about 4000 years ago, on the order of Proto-Indo-Iranian, Proto-Uralic (per Juha Janhunen and Jaakko Häkkinen) or Proto-Austro-Asiatic (per Paul Sidwell), to keep this into perspective. The Svan language is wildly different from the Georgian language, and their traditional cultures are very different, too, compare Svan people. Claiming that Svans are Georgians (ethnically, as opposed to the "citizens of Georgia" sense) is like saying that the Sami people are all Finns or the Bretons (and other Celtic nations) – let alone the Occitans – are French, just because they speak distantly related languages. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 13:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * So isn't it just safe to say the Svans are a Kartvelian people (like e.g. Hungarians are a Uralic people), instead of calling them a 'subethnic group of Georgians'? --JorisvS (talk) 21:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Or something arbitrarily more wordy and precise ("an ethnolinguistic group traditionally associated with a Kartvelian language", for example; well, "language" is a problematic term, too, but I can't think of a better phrasing that isn't ridiculously verbose). In principle, yes, but given that "Kartvelian" is likely understood as "Georgian" by speakers of Georgian, "South Caucasian" may be better, and possibly more immediately helpful to general readers trying to place the Svans geographically and linguistically. In any case, a link to Kartvelian languages is highly recommended. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Also note that (to take your example) Hungarians does not even mention Uralic in the lede, only Hungarian. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:59, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The issue has been discussed many times. The reliable sources have established that the Svans are almost universally categorized as a Georgian subgroup. Why so many people here want me to reconsider my ethnic identity? :) --KoberTalk 21:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not everybody agrees that the Svans are ethnic Georgians, especially not all Svans. Your personal opinion is not what we are discussing here. We're just trying to find a phrasing that is both NPOV and precise. Which would mean that we could skirt the issue and have no need for any of the sources in question. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, ethnicity is a complicated thing. Croatians and Serbians are ethnically distinct but speak the same language (Serbo-Croatian) and there is a village in India where one group speaks one language and another one speaks an only very distantly related one but those groups consider themselves to be of the same ethnicity.
 * I don't see how "an ethnolinguistic group traditionally associated with a Kartvelian language" would be more precise than simply "a Kartvelian people". --JorisvS (talk) 22:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That wasn't a serious suggestion, but I do think it is more precise, just unnecessarily so because the shorter phrasing, by current convention, conveys the same meaning. It is true that ethnic (self-)identification is a headache, but it is complicated enough without people confusing it with citizenship or mere ethno-linguistic relationship, as in demonstrable common origins of some sort.
 * Just out of curiosity, does Kober object to the title of our article about the Svans being Svan people? After all, he seems to disagree with the notion of the Svans as a people, i. e., an ethnic group, so the article should be at Svan Georgians. Does he also consider the Laz people in Turkey Georgians? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Florian, that was not my personal opinion, but what the reliable sources say and what the people whom I know much better than you think of themselves. Where are the sources supporting your claim that "not all Svans" self-identify as Georgians? Are you a spokesperson for the Svans? Neither am I but at least I am one of them. As for your questions regarding the article titles, I don't think that the "people=ethnic group" formula is very accurate. Ethnic identity is a set of many cultural and social traits, and the primary language is by no means the only determining factor. The Laz of Turkey are not Georgians, because they don't identify themselves as such and have been only very peripherally involved in the very complex, centuries-long interaction among the Kartvelian groups that has led to the ethnogenesis of the modern Georgian people. Only the minority of the Laz dwelling in Georgia have assumed the all-Georgian ethnic identity. Regarding your claims about differences in traditional cultures, they can be found in any other region of Georgia. You might be amazed, but traditional cultures in Georgia vary significantly from village to village even in the linguistically "properly Georgian" regions such as Imereti] and Kakheti. I don't think that anyone with the knowledge of the Kartvelian microworld would treat the Imeretians and Kakhetians as different ethnic groups.
 * In short, you should provide the reliable sources asserting that the Svans are not Georgians and/or "not all" of them consider themselves Georgians. Please make sure that these sources outnumber and outweigh those proving the opposite so as not to make the minority views and fringe theories rule in the article. Thanks, KoberTalk 04:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * A people is an ethnic group, "ethnic group" is merely a more scientific-sounding term. It's hardly surprising that regional cultures vary, but the question is whether they differ on the same order. Do Imeretians and Kakhetians retain pre-Christian customs? Are Russians Lithuanians or Lithuanians Russians, only because they speak distantly related languages? Surely the Russians did at some point push that POV that Lithuanians are a "brother nation" if not more, for purely imperialistic reasons. This is ultimately a political issue. Svans who do not view themselves as ethnic Georgians are dangerous as they could start a secessionist movement, and that's something deeply feared in Georgia. Wikipedia better take a neutral issue on the issue of what the Svans are, neither referring the Georgian POV nor the secessionist POV, so a NPOV wording is preferrable. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd disagree with you. A people can refer to any group with a clearly defined ethnic, subethnic, regional, or religious identity. I have to repeat myself and ask you to provide sources for your claim that there is any, non-negligible segment of the Svan population whose self-identity is not Georgian. Otherwise, the discussion can be a deadlock. Regarding your question on cultural variability, yes, both Imeretians and Kakhetians retain pre-Christian customs. And I don't quite understand what the Russian-Lithuanian example has to do with all of these. Croatians and Serbians speak essentially the same language, but they are different ethnic groups. The "language=ethnic group" formula is now endorsed only by the most conservative ethnolinguists and, to the best of my knowledge, is not currently considered to be a majority point of view. Also, I would greatly appreciate if you could provide reliable sources on any potential or feared, perceived or real secessionist movement among the Svans. Let's recall that Wikipeda is not a crystal ball. The "NPOV wording" you are referring to should be based on reliable sources and not on someone's original research and not-very-successful comparisons with other ethno-ideological controversies. --KoberTalk 18:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I am Svan myself, and I better know what we are. We are Georgians. But we recognize ourselves as Svan mostly. Like when someone asks us, we like to respond as that we are Svan, so we consider ourselves as both Svan and Georgian. But most likely, Svans. Nikoloz Ratiani (talk) 14:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Unesco Red Book
The Unesco Red Book of Endangered Languages is the most reliable source about levels of language endangerment there is. It is compiled and written by experts on language endangerment. You do not get to discredit it because you disagree with it. If you have a source of comparable reliability that contradicts it then that viewpoint can also be included - removing the Unesco red Book is not an option.·Maunus· ƛ · 17:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

"Version"?
The article says that Verbs are marked for aspect, evidentiality and "version". What in the world is "version", in quotes, even? Can some Svan-speaker provide examples, or better yet, a reference to a grammar or something? --Wtrmute (talk) 12:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The only other mention of 'version' as a grammatical category I've heard of is in Ithkuil, but I don't know if this has anything to do with the 'version' in Svan. --JorisvS (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * There is a section on version in the Georgian grammar page. It seems to be a rather subtle feature of the verb in Kartvelian languages. And here's a question I asked about version on linguistics.stackexchange.com: Do languages besides the Kartvelian family have a property of verbs called “version”? &mdash; Hippietrail (talk) 09:54, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Phonology
None of Svan dialects has phonemes /v/, /f/ and /ʔ/. See http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/armazi/armaziII/c_laut/kartlaut.htm#svan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.87.130.196 (talk) 07:18, 7 June 2013 (UTC)